Welcome to Jester's Trek.
I'm your host, Jester. I've been an EVE Online player for about six years. One of my four mains is Ripard Teg, pictured at left. Sadly, I've succumbed to "bittervet" disease, but I'm wandering the New Eden landscape (and from time to time, the MMO landscape) in search of a cure.
You can follow along, if you want...

Thursday, March 13, 2014

COTW: What's changed?

Obviously, the comments have already started coming in on my two introductory posts about the culture of EVE Online. And trust me: there are more posts coming. But an anonymous commenter brought up a really good question that I want to address. I quote his comment in full (it's worth a read):
So... where'd this strange moralistic streak come from? Eve's always been this kind of game. Ganking, theft, and betrayal have been glorified ever since the early days, with Guiding Hand Social Club setting the pace. It's kind of notable that a new player can get killed and scammed out of hundreds or thousands of dollars in formerly-real-money assets. Even so, worse then that has been perpetrated and applauded for nearly a decade. There are many Eve players who got involved after hearing about GHSC, even years after the fact. You seem a little old to be just now realizing that there are sharks in these waters, but I haven't heard you complain like this before. What's changed?
What's changed? The intensity level, that's what's changed.

Bringing up the GHSC assassination/theft draws several really interesting parallels with recent events in EVE. That plot, which took place in 2005, was a year in the making. Over the course of its success, 20 billion ISK in items were stolen and 30 billion ISK in ships were destroyed. The plot was made public, but it was made quite clear that it was all business: it was a contract executed after GHSC had been paid to do so. There were no personal feelings in the matter and even though the plot was public knowledge and covered in the gaming press, the target was not made to feel humiliated.(1) And though thousands of people joined EVE after this plot hoping to execute something like this themselves one day, the majority of the actual EVE population at the time roundly condemned GHSC's actions, calling them "contemptible" and "disgusting." "I hope you rot in your own filth," one commenter declared.

Compare and contrast to the recent Raven Navy Issue ganking:
  • The value lost and the value taken in the initial gank were both about the same.
  • The amount of work needed was a laughable fraction of that needed by GHSC, a couple of days work at most.
  • The victim was then personally targeted for even further loss and humiliation, more than doubling the size of the GHSC plot.
  • The target was roundly and publicly humiliated.
  • The majority of the EVE population who have heard about this have cheered the action.
While there are a few people out there using words like "contemptible" and "disgusting" to describe this more recent scam, I daresay they're not the majority.

So yeah. There have been a few changes in EVE's culture in the intervening nine years.

It used to be that a juicy target was suicide ganked, and that was enough.

Then it used to be that a juicy target was suicide ganked, a few sarcastic or insulting things were written in the kill board comments which almost nobody read, and that was enough.

Then it used to be that a juicy target was ganked, a few sarcastic or insulting comments were written in the kill board comments, a story was written about the gank somewhere, and that was enough.

Then it used to be that a target was ganked, sarcastic or insulting comments were written in the kill board comments, the victim was interviewed and made to feel embarrassed, a story was written about the gank somewhere, and that was enough.

Then it used to be that a target was ganked, many sarcastic or insulting comments were written in the kill board comments, the victim was interviewed and made to feel embarrassed, a story was written about the gank somewhere, other EVE players sent in-game mails or attempted to contact the victim and would try to get a rise out of him for their own personal jollies, and that was enough.

And now it's that a target is ganked, many insulting comments are written in the kill board comments, the victim is interviewed and publicly humiliated, a story is written about the gank on a website that gets tens of thousands of visitors, other EVE players send in-game mails or attempt to contact the victim and try to get a rise out of him for their own personal jollies, they look into his past losses looking for other embarrassing stories to tell, and they or others try to scam him into even more humiliating losses... and that isn't enough.

Seriously... you can ask me what's changed? Isn't it obvious? And where does it end?

Thanks for the comments, everyone! Keep 'em coming!

(1) Matter of fact, test yourself: without looking it up, who was the target of this plot?


  1. Since I was responcible for both of the pieces mentioned here, I feel compelled to ask something.

    How responcible do you hold those that make these events public? How responcible so you hold those that lost these ships, and how responcible do you hold the EVE audience that drinks up this kind of content eagerly (the article on the raven topped 135k views today, the moros is nearing 30k).

    How do you feel that this trend will impact the future of the EVE community, and do you think it's possible to reverse this trend if the effect will be negative.

    1. It's an interesting question. I'm honestly not sure.

    2. It's a interesting question only in that it's interesting how it doesn't work.

      Everyone knows the old axiom that responsibility without power is meaningless, but perhaps some people have forgotten that 'holding someone responsible' without the power to actually hold them there, making them pay for what they've done, is meaningless. If you don't have that power, you might as well replace "how responsible do you hold" with "How much credit do you ascribe to". That's what this entire series of posts seems to be about, analyzing who holds the power to hold people responsible, and how they are using it. EVE is set up so that if you play properly, you can avoid most risk, so there's not much one can do to prevent such bad behavior. It also means that this bad behavior is only targeted as those that leave themselves targets; which leaves the question open "Does what one has to do to not leave themselves a target, in EVE, make EVE a worse game?" I would answer this question with a 'yes', although it's just one piece of the puzzle. (I manufacture hundreds of billions of ISK worth of goods every month; all solo, because EVE is an MMORPG which incentivizes solo play in many areas) You could basically go through the areas where people form large corporations/alliances and say "that's what EVE does right", and look at the small corps/alliances and say "EVE is doing that wrong". The thing is, I think most pilots are in small corps, even though EVE is doing those areas wrong--which means there's a lot of pent up demand for CCP to fix those areas of the game.

    3. I do think you bear at least some responsibility. For the time I have been playing EVE and reading TMC I have noticed that your ALOD articles have changed their tone toward worse. It has been gradual, but lately it has grown enough that I have finally noticed it.
      Now, while I do think you bear some responsibility, each and every player does bear responsibility of their own reaction to the events and what they speak (or type) - for good or ill. Keeping that in mind, we all can and should do our part to change the direction EVE community is going so that instead of downward spiral we have slow but steady improvement. No one can do it alone, but with enough of us we can get something done.

    4. Those who make these events public and then also join in on the humiliation and shame part (which I feel your personal comments in the article do) are responsible for a share with everyone in the community. There are those who gank, those who report, those who are victimized, and those who watch.

      Asking who is responsible is a cop out and anyone with a sense of ethics knows it. Any member of the groups listed above in questionable action can then try to argue for their own minimization of responsibility however it gets assigned and throw it onto the other parties (ie... blame the gankers, blame the victim, blame the audience).

      The true question is: As the party responsible for the piece do you feel you are actively fighting against the escalating tide of nastiness, neutral to it, or actively supporting it? This question should also apply to your editors and publisher, but they have clearly adopted the ethics free reporting embraced throughout the world of game journalism.

      Rarely does a trend get reversed without leadership to actively fight it. If CCP takes steps to end it, what articles are you going to write then? I'm betting articles about the rightness of CCP's action to curb this kind of thing either won't be written or won't be published at TMC.

    5. and how responsible should be held the players cause the loss of ships? odd that in Eve when a crime occurs in Eve, the perpetrator is rarely accountable - the victim almost always so.

    6. "How responsible do you hold those that make these events public?"

      You very publicly humiliated the guy in a website run by a guy with a history of cyberbullying. You must be very proud.

    7. "How do you feel that this trend will impact the future of the EVE community, and do you think it's possible to reverse this trend if the effect will be negative."

      Degenerate behavior will negatively impact the future of EVE. I know people will say this type of game play will "weed out the weak". This is ironic because it is the weak players that many vets want because they are easy to exploit. It is possible to reverse this trend by making this type of behavior less alluring. I'm all for ganks and pvp however, the harassment is ridiculous and does not add content or value to the game.

      Also as far as who is responsible, anyone who has participated is responsible. This isn't that confusing. If TMC is celebrating/encouraging people getting harassed out of game and persecuted then yes you're responsible of something that is negative. If you are just reporting facts then you're responsible for just that.

  2. "The majority of the EVE population who have heard about this have cheered the action." Source?

    "While there are a few people out there using words like "contemptible" and "disgusting" to describe this more recent scam, I daresay they're not the majority." Surely you would know they're not the majority if you know the previous quote to be true. These two quotes are inconsistent.

    Please don't make up statistics. Elementary intellectual honesty is not to be made a casualty of your agenda. I appreciate your general point of view but it is eroded by poor argumentation, and I daresay I'm not the only follower of your blog who has noticed it.

    1. Look at the responses on the killmail, on the TMC story.

      I'm sure if you also asked the poor guy who is getting PM'd constantly about his loss, he would confirm this.

    2. Throwing out charges of intellectual dishonesty, when what he meant was very obvious, has the effect of eroding the gravity of the charge through overuse. If intellectual honesty is in any danger here, it's from you.

      If you're unhappy with his clear and obvious individual perspective, either state your disagreement, or provide data proving him wrong. Please don't make up spurious charges like this.

    3. Just have a look at the comments on the mittani's raven aticlle to get a good idea of the range and tone of comments. Hardly scientific but I think quite indicative of the general concensus.

    4. I am not ready to say intellectual dishonesty, but you do have to ask what percentage of the community is being used here to judge the community as a whole.

      Conservatively, there are at least 100,000 people who play on Tranquility. Is that a good number?

      And the number of people who comment at TMC or EN24 or Kugu or on kill boards is... what? 1,000 people? 2,000? Maybe 5,000? I cannot imagine it is more than that, but it could be I suppose.

      Is that sample representative of the of the population as a whole? Do we assume that anybody who did not step forward and say "disgusting" or "contemptible" has automatically endorsed the action by their silence?

      I don't mind a discussion about morality. A life without reflection and all that. But how wide are we planning to make the brush when we paint the conclusion.

    5. Well 1000 out of 100000 is a good percentage to do your statistics, so long you ensure your sample isn't biased, which clearly is the case. The people who commented are far more likely to frequent these sites regularly, and thus their usual content.

      And, no, you wouldn't assume that the 99000 that didn't say anything endorse it, you'd assume that the percentages pro/against it remain the same in the sample and the whole population.

    6. You also have to take into account the type of person attracted to TMC, and also, much more importantly the type of person who is inclined to comment. I'm sure lots of those 135k readers felt kinda bad for the guy, but... well, what do you say? Too bad. That was my reaction, I thought it was sad; the guy was just so clueless. And to lose that much money? Ouch.

      But if you have a shitty comment, well, then you've got to type it out! Look at the comments for anything, in EVE or outside. Look at the comments on a YAHOO news story. It's a spawning pool for lowlifes. If you were from another country or planet or whatever and read the YAHOO comments, you'd swear Americans were the biggest d-bags of all time. They'd be shocked to discover it's the most charitable and generous nation of people of all time. Yes, I realize I am commenting on a news story, make of that whatever you will.

      Of all the people who read it, which is astounding if that number is true, it's the worst of the bunch that comments. As ruthless as EVE is, in my experience the people in it are not representative of the commenters on TMC or E24. In short, I don't think it is as unanimous as you think. I think there's sympathy for this guy , although it's a hopeless sort of sympathy. The loss was bad enough, but I don't think he's ever gonna understand anything. If not for the hopeless aspect I bet he would have gotten plenty of donations; he probably did get some even as things stand. There's lots of goodhearted people in the world- even a few in EVE!

  3. A bunch of sadists chasing the dragon.

  4. I've read both these posts, pondered them thoroughly, and honestly can't imagine that someone as astute as you could fail to see the bigger picture at work here.

    It isn't CCP's no-hold's barred attitude towards the single-shard universe either. They have simply arranged the canvas, supplied the paint, and crafted the tools. Heck, the fact that they're willing to step up in the name of moral decency sheds light onto the true cause of the escalating nature of "harvesting tears" you so diligently pointed out!

    The reason for all of this is the simple advance of technology and its effect on society.

    Think long and hard about the differences between 2005 and 2014, e.g. You Tube was founded and the iPhone wasn't released yet. A whole generation of gamers entered and played EVE with an entirely different set of habits, proclivities, and societal outlook that would be (and is) considered quaint today (treat each other fairly?? people actually do that?). Ponder just for a moment what the world would look like to someone born in the 90's without smartphones and the simple shared connectivity of today, disturbing huh... like the 80s? Even I can't live without a smartphone and the 90's were a developmental period for me, not a nursing one!

    Ask a thirty something about that time they were spanked in school for misbehavior and you'll get a yarn based on the "personal" experience. Ask a twenty something about the same thing and you're more likely to receive a yarn based on a "shared" experience... one in which all their friends (coast to coast), that dude from India, and that weird chick from Brazil all piped up with their own impressions of the situation, words of encouragement, and how it should be handled. That's assuming a twenty something of today even knows what a spanking is!

    Young(er) people today are simply much more in-tune and comfortable with technology and to an even greater extent the sharing of information. You couple these ingredients with the hard-headedness and continual one-upmanship that comes with being a young adult and you have a seismic shift in the way this game (in particular) is played and enjoyed.

    The game hasn't changed, the society in which it resides has. To you Jester, with the prism of your experience fastened to an earlier age of the game, it appears to be a gradual slope into anarchy. Honestly, its just business as usual.


    1. Your argument that EVE reflects real world society is both telling and correct.
      But to suggest that nothing is wrong with EVE implies that nothing is wrong with modern society, which if we take a good long look we know in our hearts, that is not so.
      The competition for resources in the EVE universe is a game. The competition for the fossilised energy that powers people and transport is very real and vicious.
      If CCP wants a responsible player-base it will have to solve the worlds problems, not it's own.

  5. Jester, you are probably familiar with the work in greater depth, but consider Plato's thoughts on the ethics and the reality of a situation where an individual can act without any consequences:

    "Suppose now that there were two such magic rings [Rings of Gyges], and the just put on one of them and the unjust the other; no man can be imagined to be of such an iron nature that he would stand fast in justice. No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, or go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, or kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.

    "Then the actions of the just would be as the actions of the unjust; they would both come at last to the same point. And this we may truly affirm to be a great proof that a man is just, not willingly or because he thinks that justice is any good to him individually, but of necessity, for wherever any one thinks that he can safely be unjust, there he is unjust.

    "For all men believe in their hearts that injustice is far more profitable to the individual than justice, and he who argues as I have been supposing, will say that they are right. If you could imagine any one obtaining this power of becoming invisible, and never doing any wrong or touching what was another's, he would be thought by the lookers-on to be a most wretched idiot, although they would praise him to one another's faces, and keep up appearances with one another from a fear that they too might suffer injustice.
    — Plato's Republic, 360b-d (Jowett trans.)"

    1. More commonly known as the "John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory": Normal Person minus Consequences plus Audience equals Total Fuckwad.

      Of course the theory is not limited to EVE. But only EVE has mechanics to enable being a dick beyond shouting obscenities in the chat(scamming, ganking, etc.). And only EVE has caustic enough community - because it's supposed to be "hardcore" so all the people playing it are by proxy "hardcore", which makes them act above and beyond the call of douchebaggery - to fully support it.

      The worst thing is, this could be very easily fixed by enforcing one character per player, which would enable a degree of personal responsibility and introduce consequence to one's actions(which currently simply does not exist in the game). But that won't be done, since it would cut the amount of subscribers by ~2/3. And CCP can't allow to lose this income even if they honestly wanted to.

    2. Propers for Plato.

      EVE gives us immortality, and we spend it on pranking and one-upping each other. Like the gods of Olympus, sort of.

  6. I am honestly looking forward to how this turns out. I think this is a good thing to ask, and for the community to discuss.

  7. Victim of this gank and scam is a rather special snowflake, presenting unique combination of fat wallet and complete lack of common sense. If you read his interview in which he further proves himself being one giant moron, that's comedy gold right there. He claims he's 40 year old lawyer, yet he promises to find gankers IRL to create them "troubles", he accuses others of being envy of his wealth, he blindly rejects entire community because it doesn't fit his moral code. He sounds like a little kid that got beaten at card game, not like a solid mature person. I'd say he fully deserved what he got.

    And if you think more about it, there is always, always some idiot being a subject for trolling and mockery for losing some ridiculously expensive stuff in some ridiculosly stupid way. Do all of these guys deserve the mockery? No. But do most of them deserve it? Absolutely. I don't see it as special trait of Eve community. Fools and idiots of all sorts always used to be subjects for scoffing. Folklore, anecdotes, literature, theatre, cinema - human culture has thousands examples of some foolish character being ridiculed. If you want to change that attitude within community, you have to change entire culture, that has been for centuries cultivating the point that stupidity must not be tolerated, but laughed at, the harder the better.

    1. Isn't this what we call in modern society the mentality of the bully?

      The person who believes that they are smarter then someone else, and anyone who is not as smart as them "deserves it". In this case, it appears that some of this is driven was a sense of jealousy over what someone has, and clearly this bully must have less.

      No one "deserves" something. No one wakes up each morning and is somehow pre-destined to receive abuse. While this guy presented himself in a silly way and did something ill advised, in no way does that automatically entitle anyone to target him for bullying.

  8. As to the "cheering", there's become a thing lately with high-sec losses, anything revolving around suicide gank targets or mission runners; not so much from the wardeccers

    The boards are permeated with a near-endless crusade against the evils of "Carebears" who seem to be anyone trying to make money in high sec by any means that is not taking it from someone else by force or trickery.

    This sort of thing has had to be nerfed over the years in order to balance it, and so there seems to be a culture now of a constantly screeching about ways to either make it BLATANTLY easier to get kills, or else about the carebears that are supposedly responsible for these nerfs. The "carebear blaming" is essentially the same "goons got X nerfed" argument; whether the situation is balanced or not is put aside in favor of simply framing easier kills as "good for the game" with lots of buzzwords about content and emergent gameplay and whining about the carebears crying for nerfs who are actually not very prevalent.

    The ultimate expression of this is the James 315/Erotica 1/CODE crowd that is in a constant state of hystrionics about miners. I don't think that it's an accident that this behavior is tied in with the most notorious scammer in EVE, although your comment about Erotica 1's CSM campaign is what made the connection "click".

    What it basically comes down to is that a lot of highsec gankers, and the low/null alts and other passersby deeply resent the highsec players fairly low risk. There's some argument to be made about overall risk/reward in null vs low vs high, but that debate is drowned out amid "punish the carebears!" many of whom are really just income alts anyhow, and garnished with a nice side of distraction about AFK gameplay.

    The attackers simply don't seem to get how the economy is balanced, how players are retained, or what purpose highsec really serves; it's just "themepark" (another buzzword) to them because highsec = high difficulty for the ganker/griefer. In their view, highsec non-pvpers are there for no other reason than to get attacked, and if they quit or the economy suffers massive inflation or deflation, its unimportant as long as the gankers don't lose THEIR fun. Those would be the effects of most of the thankfully ignore ideas to "fix" highsec - near total collapse of the game economy and playerbase. Suggestions like "cut all empire highsec off from the other empires except through lowsec" and "don't give out any bounties to missioners because I can't steal that" to name a few LESS extreme suggestions. James's aborted CSM platform epidomizes this nonsense, and Erotica's is not much different, troll campaing though it may be.

    The problem basically comes down to players of the predatory style living in constant fear of nerfing for their behavior, and yet constantly being more extreme about it to prove that they CAN, whether that involves blowing things up or.. mayonaisse. The highsec predator community has gotten the idea that it is entitled to determine what is and isn't acceptable gamplay for everyone else (in highsec at least; they're mysteriously absent from my part of lowsec at least), not just that it's allowed to attack people.

    What needs to happen is that the community narritive, especially on the forums, needs to be steered away from the idea of policing how other people play the game, and understanding that no one's sense of entitlement is catered to.

    1. The problem with your statement is that highsec's sense of entitlement has been repeatedly catered to. The fact of which should be apparent to anyone that has lived extensively anywhere else but highsec.

      Especially when such things as the MTU aggression nerf come down the pipe after sufficient crying.

      The "predators" you talk about *should* be defensive of their playstyle, they have plenty of historical reason to be that way. Their playstyle has seen more nerfs than pretty much anything else in the game. Is it really surprising that they both showboat what accomplishments they are still allowed to have, while at the same time bemoaning that they are able to do little else?

    2. Interestingly, the problem with YOUR statement is that any "sense of entitlement" on the part of "highsec" in general is nonexistent. The small sampling of people that complain to CCP never represented highsec overall.

      It may be no surprise that predators behave as they do because they've seen so many nerfs - but that's what it took to get these playstyles under control and balanced. The highsec predator, moreover, is the most entitled of all playstyles in the game. Look at the MTU aggression nerf. There was no "crying" going on at all, except on the part of the predators who loved it becuase it allowed them to circumvent the basic rule of highsec - You can only be forced into combat through wardecs, which cost money, suicide ganking which costs ships, or by consenting in some direct way (and no, undocking is not the consent in question).

      That's what makes high sec space highsec. It isn't "Safe" but it is MORE SECURE. The MTU aggression fix wasn't even a nerf - it was a fix to an unintended consequence of the MTU being put in, and simply returned things to the status quo as if the MTU was never there in the first place.

      Highsec predatory playstyles are the ones that must be most tightly controlled and restricted by CCP, or they will run roughshod over the economic engine that allows the game to function in the name of "tears" or "sandbox" or whatever. That tendency is why Jester is writing these columns.

      No, it's no surprise that highsec predators moan and showboat - that playstyle reflects exactly that sort of entitled mentality, wherein one's own actions are justified and anyone in oppositions are denigrated with semantics, and detached discussion or willingness to see the larger picture are simply ignored. The carebears may do it too, but they do it out of ignorance - it's the predators that do it out of entitlement.

    3. How about CCP fixing nullsec issues, and then more "carebears" would simply move there.

  9. What I don't understand, and nobody comments on, how does a 'newbie' get to fly a Raven. I understand buying one and buying mods with PLEX. But where does he get the SP to fly this ship?

    1. He wasn't a total newby. He has nearly two years worth of SP.

    2. He wasn't brand new, the character was about a month old when he was blown up. It only take 3 days to get Caldari Battleship to 1 since they change to the ship skill progression tree. I think Cruise Missiles would be the hardest thing to train up. All those officer mods only require enough skills to use T1 mods.

  10. Thanks for answering my question.
    To follow up; okay, so people are being mean on the forums and such. Again... this is new? I'm an '08 player, so GHSC itself was before my time, but as I recall, C&P and similar forums were full of gank stories, mockery, and tears from the time I first joined, and I really haven't noticed any real differences in the time I've been playing. Now, the quality of griefing is always going to be subjective, so actual evidence one way or the other is going to be hard to come by, and will be mostly anecdotal in any event. That said, opinion quotes in a mainstream news article are not where I'd expect griefer-type comments to be aired, so judging 'majority' opinions from that seems dubious. Any chance you could back up your position with links to relevant forum threads? I think that'd probably be more reflective of actual player opinions, and would help to demonstrate the progression you're suggesting.

  11. Does seem as though the negative parts of the eve community have more voice or just louder. Eve just sets it up so they can say terrible things without peers thinking less of them.

    1. I think every griefer community is built on the presumption of peers cheering them on, for otherwise they would not be so apt to repeat their behavior.

      We are not their peers. They may drag us down to their level and beat us with experience, but i doubt your claim that every single eve player is my 'peer', ipso facto.

      I think the "negative parts of the eve community" are 'risk averse' to the core - this includes both carebears and griefers...those who want all the risk put upon others and none for themselves. Hence my insistence that they wouldn't be so vocal if they didn't get expressions of assent from those they consider their peers.

      I'd ask the goonies their opinion of pubbie scrubs, if you don't believe me.

  12. I remember reading something about online griefing most likely being the outcome of the wish to have an effect on the world around them.
    Eve is always being talked about as a sandbox that you can do so much in but time after time people find they don't have any real power or effect. Without the power to build the only real effect most people can hope for is to effect someone else in a way that is remembered.

    1. power or effect. hmmm...after the effect of mining too long or missioning even for a little bit, i have the urge to strangle puppies. or kill small fluffy bunnies. I think affecting violence on some player boats to be just the panacea i need occasionally.

      but do i remember it much? nope. neither does the victim. oh, i'm sure that's not what the epic stories are about tho (i can recall a 'revenge' video by CCP that fits the bill for drama nicely)

      who cares, it's a game. Would i simply mine if the opportunity to gank was removed from the game? probably. I love mining in outer space. I'd probably just go play another game to alleviate the eventual monotonous feeling i get every now and then.

    2. "Who cares, it's a game" is about the same level of response as "They're only words, they can't hurt you". Except they can, rather a lot.

      One of the big attractions of EVE is that you feel attached to things, ships you fly have actual worth for you - even if not the isk cost, losing a ship means potentially causing the bigger fight to be lost.

      I don't think that because it's "just a game", the interactions happening in it mean any less than they do anywhere else in life. Just because a griefer feels that way about the game doesn't mean their victim shares the same values, nor that the victim is "playing the game wrong" or (and I hate this phrase) should HTFU.

      The only form of consequences there can be for bad behaviour in EVE though is cultural oppression, a downlooking on people who behave in an undesirable manner - but with most people ignoring the issue and the vocal minority making their vitriol public with such ease...

  13. Eves not for everyone. U are told.from.day one to fly what u can afford to lose if your response to this is to spend 1800 on a ship well nature is going to take its course. Survival.of the fittest thats what this game is all about. If u dont like that there's an easy theme park somewhere theme for you. What makes eve different is that its not the happy wow clone crap every other mmo today is. And I for one would like to keep it that way. If the horrible community is driving off subs how's this the only mmo growing after 10 years?

    1. blah blah effing blah "don't fly what you can't afford to lose"
      Yes, it's a nice trite saying to use but it just comes off as the most arrogant elitist prick condescension.
      What pray tell are the n00bs who flounder about losing ship after ship with fittings noone in their right mind would use if they had the experience...but n00bs don't so they eventually will go through all the career agent freebies right quick.
      The usual routine is for a n00b (carebear or griefer) is to lose whatever ship they scraped together and go back to mining until they can afford the next attempt, usually outfitted poorly.

      As for the "don't fly what you can't afford to lose" in the context of "1800" that's pretty insulting since the player in question most likely has a comfortable upper middle class career (he mentioned being a lawyer, yes?) and can easily blow that in a lark...just like i'm sure that rattlesnake pilot lost ratting in low sec. *shakes head*
      It's insulting because it cheapens the frustration of those of lesser RL paygrades...

      ...makes me think Mittani himself is the lawyer in question, trolling us all. lol

  14. Angry mustache makes the same point that occurred to me. The difference is the EvE blogs and media sites. They didn't exist before. It's players who want e-fame either to glorify or condemn these actions that have driven the change you describe. CCP can't and won't (and shouldn't) do much about it, they want and need the publicity.

    As for the scammed Jita victim in your original post in this series, and "The Wis", and any other player who can't distinguish a video game from real life, I say HTFU or don't play. No one is entitled to "win" any video game and anyone who would harm him/herself over one is a moron. I played Little League when I was a kid. If I missed a catch on a fly ball and a teammate or someone from the opposing team made fun of me and I killed myself, I would be the one with the problem, not the game of baseball.

    1. Ah yes. I was going to mention "The Wis" incident.

      Let's not forget that Mittens incited people to bully and harass another player who had done him no harm into killing himself in real life. Because that player was though to be in a vulnerable mental state. All for no other reason than his own twisted amusement.

      What a nice guy. What a great figurehead for EVE, What a shining example.

  15. New players shouldn't have that kind of money to lose/be scammed out of. Back in the day you had to earn it. Large scale scams were rare and impressive because the money was in the hands of older players that should know what they are doing. New players are scammed due to ignorance. You'd hope that the publicity the raven scam got would be a warning to others but I doubt that will be the case. Solve the ignorance and the scams go away (mainly).
    The abuse side is the real problem and it's not specific to EVE. Keep banning people until the point gets across.

  16. This post, and especially the comments following, seem especially relevant:


    Everyone involved is an alumnus of Suddenly Ninjas.

  17. The supposed problem of escalation that you're referring to is the very thing you espouse so often on this blog.

    That being, the game has become more mainstream and more popular. More people, more responses, more attention, more space for reporting.

    It comes with the territory.

  18. While I have nothing to say at this point for or against your assertion that the Eve Community is going down the drain, I will point out that 40 Billion ISK circa 2005 was worth a LOT more than 40 billion ISK is today. Noizy might know exactly how much. Trying to play off that the Navy Raven was twice the scam is a bit inaccurate.

    I was also around at the time of GHSC's heist, and my recollection of the community's response differs a bit from yours... were you playing back then, or did you find some selective forum posts to reference?

    1. Aye, i remember the event being lauded and noone pointing out that the "it was impersonal and professional hit" spiel is an oft used roleplay excuse for griefing some random yokel.
      I'm sure the CEO of Seraph Ubiqua, i think the name began with Mora, had a nice idea yet i'm sure his corporate infrastructure totally blew (since it's CCP's damned fault for leaving the ramshackle beta-programming to rot) and some random thief decided to waltz right in and not only awox (before the term was coined) but loot. It was probably so easy anyone could have done it.

      Beyond mourning the death of a promising social group, i merely learned to treat with suspicious CCP's corporate mechanics and figured they'd never get around to fixing it.

      I'm sure there's countless unreported small corporations just annihilated by veteran corp awoxers who've had a decade's worth of experience...I'm sure none of us can compete against that, even BoB couldn't.

  19. And of course you've done nothing to fuel the fire as well...

  20. The real likely difference is with social media and the ability for like minded-sadists to bunch together far more easily.

    My own experience with a first ever podding involved the ganker immediately making an almost identically named character to that they could join the NPC corp I was in in an effort to milk more tears.

    This was more than five years ago. The individual concerned went on at a later date to try and join the CSM but quit due to "whiners". Obviously one who could give but not take. Karma. Or at least I sincerely hope so...

    In any event, my discomfort and embarrassment would have been magnified ten-fold if it had been shared across multiple forms of media and as more and more people weighed in, reinforcing and normalizing their own vindictive behaviors.

    But then that is, I suspect, really the whole point these days. Sad, isn't it.

  21. *shrug* dunno, we ganked a rattlesnake recently with a shitfit of epic proportions who was ratting in low sec. I'm sure a browse of the latest eve-kill mails would have you harvest a dozen stupid fits per hour...i mean, what were people thinking? was it just random fit button moment?

    for every infamous rage quit there's a thousand equivalent incidents with negligent drama, although i'm sure the risk-averse would have had their rages, albeit not noticed on this blog.

    Nothing has changed beyond a more solid community blogosphere, a more robust game after each successive patch, and obviously inflation.

    I think what we need to focus on is what has escaped the inflation. Mission rewards and standings to get to next level at a pace that doesn't outstrip the needed skills to upgrade one's ship type to the next level.
    I'm sure there's other things that need balancing more than ships ships ships

  22. it ends when the average person grows a brain and stops doing STUPID SHIT!
    at the end of the day there are ALOT of guides out there and the possibility of finding a player ran corp that would be looking to help said stupid person (no need to name any as there average non stupid person does come to this blog).
    it therefor comes down to said stupid person looking for the information and finding information from whatever source he chooses to use, ITS NOT HARD!
    FYI, i joind eve in 08, i think ive had all of 1 stupid loss and that was a duel tanked ship, and that was me trying something that i was told was silly but wanted to have a go anyways to see how stupid it was, lessen learnt lol

  23. I can name another thing that changed significantly. PLEX. For as much good as it's done to CCP's bottom line, it's done amazingly crappy things to the playerbase.

    1. nuh uh, mate. no way in hell. before PLEX there was RMT run rampant. *shudders* i dunno but i much prefer the way it is now than sitting beside a dozen players all named, and i shit you not:

      yeah, players will succumb to the temptation to pay $$$ to get what i prefer to mine, mission, explore and loot...i'd be lying if i told you i've never been seduced by the power of GTC (the old plex)

      oh wait, you forgot about GTCs didn't you? So what's your problem with PLEX now? What about tritanium...i actually didn't like it when it was 2 isk/pu...made being a n00b hellish.

    2. And this in a nutshell is the issue. Instant gratification leading to complete chaos.

      a) I can convince a person that EVE is the best game ever.
      b) Encourage them to "catch up" with a PLEX investment in a character and items - obtaining PLEX of course *wink* from the best place to buy.
      c) Give them a few pointers i.e. what to fit, where to travel.
      d) Loot piñata.
      e) Insert next step in EVE's parasitic behaviours encouraged by CCP.

  24. Fellow CSM delegate Ali Aras wrote on a similar topic last year,

    I imagine you already have, but if you haven't, you should discuss this stuff with her. I think the two of you could produce some interesting ideas on the matter.

    1. I'm not sure i understand the hyperbole. let me get this straight: Ali Aras says that seeing other pilots as players as opposed to some nameless "other" ('marks' as it is penned) is somehow less 'fun' or suited to the happiness quotient of a game.
      hmmm...So i take it that's the difference between griefers and carebears? one side is the dirty fingernail rogue of daring do, and the other side are pubbie scrubs who talk about their wife and kids...?
      Internet spaceships is serious business? lulz. *shakes head* I don't think i'm far off the mark on that article.

      It seems as if the article is saying that the Big Lie is more fun than boring mundane old truth. zzzz. amirite?

  25. As a business owner, I have also seen a similar change in patron attitude since the 2008 financial crisis. In my opinion, behavior in Eve is a reflection of the change in society's perception of a hopeful future.

    There are many more reasons for players in the West to experience greater frustration, e.g., 98%, occupy Wall Street, rise of China, loss of middle class, loss of high paying jobs only to be replaced with lower paying jobs. Eve is real, or at least comprised of people living in a less pleasant world than a few years ago.

    It appears to me that CCP is slightly interested in enticing and retaining new players, and has made a few changes to that effect. The two most prominent in my mind are the mining barge revamp and security overall. I also get a sense that CCP fears another mass revolt or unsub which has hindered their ability to address game mechanics which could provide appeal to a broader audience.

    The first few months of 2014 are the high point of Eve. Things will go downhill from here. CCP will likely feel some additional heat from external sources, as a large number of anticipated MMOs become available this year. Then, next year CCP will face greater competition in its' own genre, if not sooner. In the business world it is common to hear the phrase, "There are only so many pieces of the pie.", when discussing market share and growth potential. I've read articles suggesting the greater MMO audience is on the decline.

    Businesses are either growing or shrinking. Regardless of how one feels about moral decay in Eve or the lack of it, CCP will need to react to the changing MMO landscape. If CCP's goal is to grow Eve, then they will need to appeal to a larger audience. Improved tutorials and rebalanced ships will only take CCP so far towards that goal. The culture must be addressed. Seems like something was mentioned about this during last Fanfest regarding "supporting the enablers."

    I almost sense that CCP feels "Eve is fine the way it is. Eve won't grow much, but we understand that. We'll put our money into games that are designed to elicit mass appeal as a foundation, rather than an afterthought." If that's the case, the Eve you have now is the Eve you'll enjoy in the years to come, though relatively unchanged.

  26. I think some good points are made here. Would we as a community support policy changes which prevent scams/griefing/ponzi schemes/tear harvesting? Of course we wouldn't. This is eve.

    But there has been a recent nasty turn. No longer satisfied with bumping and ganking miners, they are now lured into "bonus rooms" where they are recorded and then repeatedly picked on via soundcloud. Media sites are used to humiliate people.

    Yes, in eve the game you can do what you want. It's a sandbox, but a lot of this is extending beyond the game itself - and in doing so is certainly stepping past "kicking over someone's sandcastle" into the realms of bullying.

    There really does need to be some clarification on acceptable conduct. We don't want to ruin the things which make eve great, but actually trying to cause emotional harm should not be something we stand for. Those that do so are no longer "role playing" a sociopath, they are showing those tendencies in the real world.

  27. I cant agree that CCP setting the stage for these shenanigans is the issue.
    The ability to be that 'space scum' should always be part of the Eve universe and should never be revoked. I mean, if there is no outlet in New Eden it will go somewhere else at the detriment to CCPs bottom line.

    If anything were to be done it should focus on a player driven outlet for retribution against these 'criminals' be they using the game mechanics or the meta game to their nefarious ends.

    This is where CCP could make concord a more 'realistic' law enforcing entity.
    there must be someway to incorporate a 'court of law' into the game where players / corporations and alliances using a system similar to bounties and by plying ISK could submit actions to a court which could use a jury of say CSM members?

    I've heard there is a lawyer or two who play who may be able to give valuable input ;)

  28. How far people can go ,I recently saw Twitch stream from one of Jita scamers.He was offering some prize etc .I was like wooow.Guy is just sick I guess.
    I am pvping almost every day and have my share of ganks,falkon alt things etc,but I never ever had wish to scam new player ,even older one.
    Imo this HTFU and this "eve is hard" culture is going to far.Yes we can be evil ,but there must be some limit.If not by game than by common sense.
    Also I need to add writing in local changed a lot.Amount of insults is just so sad.I understand taunting ,but this is just like I am playing some COD like game.But it does not shock me tbh,just check SOTA of some alliances and you will see it is same.It seems like EVE is great game for internet tough guys.

  29. This will probably get me shouted at...

    The level of maturity in the EvE player base has lessened. Mob mentality is increasing. Self-entitlement is increasing. The want for instant gratification is increasing.

    A lot of factors are driving this... 20 yr olds who have never known life without the 'net, grown up with being able to "live" a part of their life anonymously. Using this to override acts of normal decency. Nothing wrong with that! /s

    Social media has been facilitating mob mentality. Witness how younger folk get tetchy & abusive when challenged, unless they're surrounded by a big group of like minded people. Then they get their group and espouse how amazing they are and drown out any dissenting voices.

    The "long con" for these people is pure madness when you can mob up and gank lone pilots who are afk. Get that instant "we're the best" gratification. Going the route that requires thought and intelligence is craziness when you can mob up... etc. etc.

    Because EvE is a sandbox game, it gives the 'net generation a place to reside and an easy way of feeling superior. Taken to extremes, this means constant ridicule of anyone you happened to have "won" against, regardless of any normal existing notion of common decency.

    TL;DR It's mainly due to changes in social constructs, a generation that hasn't known life without the 'net and EvE being a sandbox game. Combine them all together and what you're describing Jester is the result.

  30. Eve Online is a game played on the internet. Players fly ships and shoot at each other or make trades with each other or both. In most PVP games success requires good reflexes, but in Eve, it's enough to be sensible and skeptical.

    Sometimes in games someone wins and someone loses and then all the spectators make comments about how dumb the loser was and how great the winner was. This is common to all games and all sports.

    Sometimes in games or sports, players exploit rules loopholes to get ahead. This is ethically grey. In the game Eve Online, asking people to give you all their stuff under false pretenses is not grey, and is not a loophole, it is explicitly permitted. Doing things expressly permitted by the rules of a game you're playing is never ever ethically wrong. Unless you're making people fight to the death in an arena in real life, or something.

  31. bingo, its the escalation of the behavior that has caused sharks to be more aggresive in their pond, therefore less people are willing to look for a place to swim over here.

  32. I believe the problem is that some take this game way too seriously, it´s a game and we play it for fun.

    So you got a great kill/gank, good for you, under normal circumstances "good fight" would be thrown out in local or some "smack talk" depending on the circumstance, but to actually take it further and keep rubbing it in the face of the player killed/ganked, that is taking it too far.

    Those few, that act like TRUE Reavers (i.e, those who truly enjoy the tears/suffering/mental distress of other players) are the ones giving the whole thing a bad rep. And yes, if you ask me, those few should be taken out back and shot by CCP for the overall benefit of the game.

    As someone put it (can't remember the name, sorry), it's a sandbox, not a beach. A sandbox has limits.

  33. I think what you're getting at here is Schadenfreude. Why is this a thing now and are so many people pursuing it?

  34. Griefers in hisec can biomas a character and have a new one in in a gank destroyer within hours.

    The "consequences" in game that arise from "decisions made" are entirely different. The PVE player (who may or may not be a new player) doesn't get to "reset" from a single decision - he isn't where he was 2 hours before that griefing attack. The griefer PLAYER perhaps pocketed a few valuable mods, harvested his fun, transferred the ISK to his (probably null sec) main, then either biomassed or dumped the now worthless alt. The losing PLAYER earns his ISK slowly, reinvesting in his ship over time. What is built in days is lost in seconds. This is very asymmetrical in its current form, because of the low SP cost of a grief alt in comparison to the PVE alt.

    I do not have an issue with ganking a ship for profit. Bling drops are ISK. But that gank comes with consequences. However, because of the asymmetrical gameplay, the consequences to the ganking player are bypass/ignored. Ganking with a character that stays in the game is hard work. This gameplay should not be made harder. Ganking with a number of disposable alts is simply too easy, and comes with no lasting consequence. This behaviour should be made more difficult.

    1. That's what i don't get...there is no way to report anonymous griefer alts ourselves and CCP probably doesn't give a rat's ass about tracking that let along coding decent tools for GMs...So why is it okay for us to recycle alts that have positive security status being the ONLY safeguard of any substance? Like you say "the consequences to the ganking player are bypassed/ignored." (by simply starting another trial account or biomassing negative sec alts and trusting CCP's eula threats are paper tigers)

      There have to be more safeguards, but "this gameplay" [SHOULD "be made harder" by concentrating on things we all know happen in flagrant disregard of all the rules in place so far: starter systems are rampant with hidden ganks by griefers who avoid posting on evekill.

      To take the recent comments about nazis and spartans to it's logical conclusion, one can't go wrong pointing out this is highly unsociable behavior but behavior that didn't go away with Nurembourg...Is CCP a bunch of racial supremacists? No, that's completely tinfoil hattery.

      So assuming CCP aren't a bunch of racist aryan vikings running a dystopic game for russian RMTers, they're pretty much complacent when it comes to thinking up decent safeguards against the vilest play styles.
      I think it's up to us to propose such safeguards to avoid them carting out the habitual complaint of theirs that we don't suggest things and just complain.

      *disabling dueling popups by default. It has to be an option in settings to opt-in to dueling.
      *followup to that: making dueling replace corporate fratricide the same way the CPSA works (those on your contact lists can engage in a limited engagement to do such things as remote repping)

      I'm not really sure about the mechanics of RR being 'hostile' or whatever so i'd appreciate some help in that area to clean up my suggestion

  35. This whole debate gets derailed in many pointless directions but is actually quite simple.

    Does Eve game design promotes the proliferation of scams and ganks? Yes!
    Does that attracts more egotistical sadists than an other game design would? Yes!
    Is a community of mainly egotistical sadists a good asset to improve new player recruitment and retention? What do you think!?

    All the rest is thinly rationalized attempt at justifying the attraction a law-less universe exerts on short-sighted fools.
    Short-sighted because the fools can't be made to understand that a game NEEDS a regular crop of new and retained players to fight off attrition.

    Let's ball a few arguments right off the bat:

    1) "I'm a noob and nothing bad happened to me. I don't see what the fuss is about?"
    Anecdotal evidence. You were just lucky. If you could put yourself in the shoes of a noob scam victim, you would get 'what the fuss is about'.
    Hopefully, you never got raped either. But you probably can figure out "what the fuss is about" in that case.

    2) "Tear farming always been part of Eve. It's not worse now than before".
    Guess what? Eve never made it in the millions of subs either. See a connection here?
    Would you rather stick to a self-defeating design because you like it or work to try to improve it?
    Your choice.

    3) "That guy was an idiot. He deserved to be punished for it. That's how you learn."
    My point exactly.
    When CCP will lose enough subs and shut down EVE, you greifers will learn the fact that YOU are the idiots and that the punishement is 'no more Eve online'.
    Jester's blog is a decent attempt at trying to push back the date that will happen as much as possible.
    You, on the other hand, just want a bit of sadistic fun you can't get in real file and will just move on to another game when this one closes. Fool!

    4) "Blah blah...Risk aversion...blah blah the economy of carebears is hurting me more than when I blow up ships or scams...blah blah"
    Oh come on! All this crap is about one thing: you enjoy getting tears out of others.
    Don't try to come up with a lame bull explanation about while it is justified to do so.
    One big diff straight up: when you scam/gank a noob, you KNOW you are hurting him personally.
    When a noob does his thing, he's NOT trying to hurt you personally. Get Real!

    I have another theory about why core griefers hates carebears:
    They are bored and look up with envy to players that are not.
    Why bored? Because Eve can't keep up the new thrilling features coming in fast enough for them.
    Why? Because CCP don't have that much free cash hanging around.
    Why? Because they don't have millions of subs; only a hundred thousand of them.
    Why? Because they can't retain new players and the game as a well-deserved rep of being tough on noobs.
    Why? Because greifers are short-sighted and only want their share of tear-farm.

    My take:
    You guys do enjoy the dark side of the game? You want to continue playing it?
    Well, you will need to put some effort (and thinking) into suggesting means to attract and keep more players.
    Because all that bull about 'Eve being harsh like real life' or 'HTFU' is NOT doing it.

    In the meantime, have your fun but keep it within reason.
    Public humiliation and harassement is NOT part of a reasonable tear-farm.
    Just like tear-farming new players is NOT part of being smart.


  36. And a seven-year veteran of EVE chimes in on the official boards:


    There might very well be a worm turning.

    The part of Ali's post that I would be interested in hearing her expand on, in this context, is the part where she mentions a "delicious little package of flying schaudenfreude[sic]," since it's schadenfreude that's the focus of the discussion. Where is the thrill in blowing up a freighter full of everything someone owns, when you assume that it won't be replaced? The Mittani talked about blow these ships up to, specifically as a way to take them out of the game. Why, unless you have a grudge? It's not like you're going to get a good fight out of a freighter.

  37. Drawing that parallel is a little dangerous though for the sake of judging reaction. The GHSC heist was a masterfully executed, and devastating raid on multiple levels. It was perpetrated against a, from what i can tell, highly skilled player who was lulled, and became complacent. It was an attack against a respected member of a community. to contrast the almost brand new player was not a long running head of a powerful organization, just some lawyer with money. The UQS gank is also understandable to people in EVE. Many can look at ourselves and have to admit that if we were faced with the same issue, odds on we wouldnt see it coming, and would be just as dead at the end of the day. The lawyer in contrast did something that even 2 day old unistas know: dont fly what you cant afford to loose. In this case affording it wasn't replacement cost of the ship. as is obvious 40 bil isk lost is nothing much for him to replace financially. In this case the ego cost was too high. He acted stupidly, partly in ignorance, but even there the EVE community looks at it and cant justify it. You don't just decide that you buy the most expensive thing you can in a game right out of the gate. Eve is billed as a pvp game, he had to know, or if he didnt know it was through active ignorance, that he could loose the ship. The second loss was just icing on the cake. If he is a lawyer i would love to face him in cort, anyone that trusting in the real world wouldn't be pittied when they lost it all, maybe not laughed at as much, but still no sympathy.

    Finally the most important thing. the lawyer was a prick, and an ass. I read the chat logs where he threatened to find the players in real life and make things difficult for them for it. It makes you cheer when he gets taken again because in those few words any sense of victim is gone. He made himself the school bully that is getting taken because the rules changed and he hasn't kept up. Are there other instances that point to an ever growing population of trolls on the internet... sure, but the case of the raven, He reaped karma in that one i am sure of it. It is such a large issue not because of the loss, but because it was done to someone who obviously felt that the best solution was to throw money at the problem. He tried to buy pixel spaceship respect, that doesn't sit well with those who work hard at their play .


    1. @Tego: *cough* No, no and well...as resounding no.

      The lawyer was provoked into a ragequit we all know and love to drink the tears of. He was not a mean spirited troll who just happened to pick on respected members of our community, or the weak.

      UQS was griefed using loopholes you can fly freighters through even today. you know it, we know it, so quit the hyperbole about the perp's old tired excuses that griefers use at a drop of a hat and trust that the EULA won't be enforced on their bullshit "roleplay" that it was some sort of code or contract or some higher authority than an itchy trigger finger on some random in the wrong place at the wrong time.

      So, it's a legitimate parallel on so many levels. And the latter half of that first sentence of yours speaks to the heart the matter for griefers: the beloved reaction. oh the reaction you want so badly and claim to get all the time from "pricks"...Which isn't really any point at all but an affirmation of the 'killer' bartle type.
      I'm sure Jester will get around to making the point that Killer types will always exist in eve and the constant exodus of achievers (the pay to win folks, the grinders, the solo mission carebears, the bling ship pilots, the careless merchant princes) who are the prey of killers in all mmogs great and small.
      I'm sure Jester will completely miss the point that CCP has about the right mix of complexity and safety to keep things interesting for the explorers who attract the achievers who attract the socializers. The cancer on the system are the killers and if CCP focuses their coding time on them to the exclusion of all else they will slowly strangle this game of theirs and this game you love to harvest tears will go out with a whimper.
      Jester's completely going to miss that point and drive home some bitter vet perspective that "our" game hangs on the razer's edge (typo intended) about gaining a bigger audience - expanding instead of simply looking at the way CCP hasn't ever focused on some aspects of the game.

      In closing, i agree with the above anonymous poster, "This whole debate gets derailed in many pointless directions"

  38. I'm really looking forward to the balance of these articles. I think, in principle, that you are right: the current ethical standards of EVE will eventually come to blows with CCP's business goals for the game. I have quibbles here and there with the fine points, like how much of the player population agrees with or gets hurt by the ethical standards as they now exist. Or whether it will all explode at once or just go down in several teapot-bound tempests. But your take on the trends seems fundamentally correct to me. I did a blog post in more detail.

    1. you are assuming CCP has a rational vision. you are sadly in error. What "current ethical standards"?? These "standards" you speak of have been in place since the days before, during and after m0o. Your ilk has pontificated and wrung hands about that hoary old chestnut then and this current tempest-in-a-teapot...without really making your point with anything but anecdotes.
      You're missing the point: Eve's killer population will eventually grow to such proportions compared to the other playstyles (and those who have an equal mix) that the exodus of customers slowly drain CCP's coffers and they'll only realize it until to late. until then you'll get them bragging to us about how the player base has grown since launch.
      It is up to us to make it painfully clear that is not us who are lacking suggestions for the devs but that it is CCP itself who have been complacent about their ethical standards (and not just the legal ass covering in the eula/tos)
      But, of course, we cannot because that would be "rude" and a loss of face for a bunch of egomaniacal alcoholic social misfits.

      I mean, it's been a goddamned decade and the loopholes used by GHSC to grief some poor fool naive and innocently ignorant are still in place.
      What other conclusion can we possibly draw?

      The killer types are drawing the long straws and who's left with the short straw? The n00b whose ignorance is not seen as innocent by said griefers. "noone is innocent" is the byword made popular by the nazi/spartan demogogues and terrorists...mmog players the world over romanticize griefing by quoting "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter"

      Who can blame them, really? This is a fun game, with lots of risk and for those that dare...win. So what if it'll eventually fade away and the servers eventually closed? I'm sure we've all played at least one mmog that met that fate. I'm looking forward to Star Citizen...there are so few sci-fi mmogs out there.

      But, still i really effing hope CCP does something about that dueling popup being enabled by default. It's such a useful tool and yet it got thrown into the game by a bunch of retards i wouldn't trust with a potatoe gun.

  39. Question, why do you think League of Legends have earned the reputation for having the worst community in online gaming?

    Go figure.

    LoL Pro Attempted Suicide
    What Is Going On With The LoL Community?

  40. What do you expect from a game that glorifies consequences and has no consequences for any half-witted player?

    There is nothing the victim can do about his lose, and there is nothing to lose to try to poke at the victim. Perfect anonymity is the root of the problem, reputation is bound to alts and not players. This is eves greatest design weakness imo.

    1. but it's every mmog's design weakness, and every mmog's design strength. what are you proposing? That we all sign in using facebook?

  41. Something to consider about Eve when compared to other mainstream MMO's over the years. Eve is heavily slanted towards one style of player. Most PVE centric players, which make up the majority of MMO players, have left Eve because it just doesn't off much in the way of PVE. Combine the lack of PVE with the lack of PVP segregated areas and you get a server most MMO players don't like.

    Which leaves most of the people playing Eve as someone who full on embraces PVP, who likes the space aspect and has found a way to be happy despite the PVP, or enjoys some other niche in the rich complexity that Eve offers.

    What you don't have though is your typical hardcore PVE fan. They leave. Which is why Eve struggles to keep 30k people online over the past few years. There are a lot of folks who have tried Eve over the years, but it's the rare player who keeps playing longer than a few months.

    Leaving all the current PVP mechanics in place there is still a LOT of room for PVE improvements to attract more gamers. Making a few changes to the way highsec works and allowing some safety to PVE centric players would appeal to even more gamers out there. Which would only increase Eve profits and expand the player base providing more action for everyone.

    Except... the PVP centric devs and player base are just about rabid over the idea that you have to be hard to play Eve. Which is untrue but much like any cult if you listen to the sermon long enough you believe it to be right and just.

  42. In my observation, most of the problem comes down to a severe lack of empathy. Players are already dehumanized via the abstraction of an avatar and, as with so many electronic platforms, it's much easier to do and say things one would never do or say to a person in real life.

    The argument that 'it's just a game, so HTFU' belies the truth that it's not just a game, it's also the players. And unlike a traditional game with balanced, clear rules and defined victory conditions, it is a sandbox. The 'tears' come because victims feel what was done was unjust and there are no true repercussions - the classroom bully wins and the teacher turns a blind eye (or worse stands back watching with a smirk). CONCORD isn't really an answer, and may likely be an enabler as it takes the power away from the victim as well...

    Ultimately, however, I don't think this is CCPs or EVE's fault. Yes, improvements can be made to game mechanics, but until people stop finding joy in inflicting pain on others - not for material gain or in a strategic territory grab, but simply to cause grief, the problem will persist. The joy at that point isn't in the game, it's in cruelty and that ethos is one which needs to end.

  43. A follow up...the lack of true conflict drivers could also be an influence on this behavior.

    There really is no reason to PvP outside of sov or FW. Economically and strategically it's much wiser to simply go about one's business - wars are expensive and a losing proposition. There really is no advantage to fighting and the only other reason to do it is because it's fun. But there are tons of better fighting games out there if that's your thing. So some people want to fight, but most don't have any incentive to do so, therefore ganking.

    Honestly, I think if territory meant something *everywhere* (not sov, but physical occupation), then the nature of conflict would change for the better (oh and allow players to join or take over CONCORD - I'm sure there are plenty of folks who would love to play the good guys if given the chance - CONCORD steals justice from victims and replaces it with empty retribution...but that is an entire thread as well)

  44. Then it used to be that a juicy target was suicide ganked, a few sarcastic or insulting things were written in the kill board comments which almost nobody read, and that was enough.

    My alliance stopped at this stage: the kill was linked in our forums and on our alliance chat, followed by some lols and "someone realized EVE isn't pay-to-win (assuming the victim buyed himself some PLEX to buy his fitting)". Then we continued doing interesting things, like mining... (but maybe we will use the killmail to show our new pilots how not to fit a ship :-) )


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.